Dáil Éireann Debate, Tuesday - 4 July 2006
72 Mr. Broughan asked the Minister for Education and Science her views on the decision of the Equality Authority in a recent case which held a school responsible for not providing a psychological assessment for a student despite the fact that the school had a much larger number of students in need of assessment than the number they were entitled to receive under her Department’s guidelines; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [25904/06]
View answerI am happy to take this opportunity to clarify for the Deputy the practice of my Department's National Educational Psychological Service (NEPS) in relation to the assessment of children.
In common with other psychological services, NEPS encourages a staged assessment process, whereby each school takes responsibility for initial assessment, educational planning and remedial intervention, in consultation with their assigned NEPS psychologist. Only if there is a failure to make reasonable progress in spite of the school's best efforts, will a child be referred for individual psychological assessment. This allows the psychologists to offer early appointments to children who are in urgent need of support and to provide advice to teachers in respect of other children whose needs may be less significant but who may still need additional help in school.
Children who manifest very special or urgent needs in school and who have not been previously assessed by a psychologist and are brought to the attention of a NEPS psychologist by the Principal teacher will usually be assessed by the psychologist within that school term. Normally, principals of schools prioritise those children in need of psychological assessment in consultation with the assigned psychologist.
In the case of the school in question, ten (10) children were seen directly by the NEPS service in the school year 2000/2001 and all other children of concern to the school were the subject of consultations with the psychologist assigned to the school. Issues related to classroom management were discussed at that time. Procedures for referral to child and family clinical services of children manifesting serious behavioural difficulties were also outlined during those consultations. This process was in line with the practice of the service and was reasonable in the context of a school with an enrolment of approximately 330 pupils.
While I do not wish to comment in any detail in regard to an individual case, the child in question was the subject of a full assessment by a NEPS psychologist in November 2002.
The Equality Tribunal has issued its findings in regard to its proceedings in this case and it would not be appropriate for me to comment any further on the matter.
